Style2

Me and My Gal (1932) Directed by Raoul Walsh

Posted by: Frank Veenstra Posted date: 4:51 PM / comment : 0 , , , , , , , , ,



(Review originally written at 21 June 2008)

Raoul Walsh was one of the greatest directors of the '30's and '40s, mainly because of the reason that his movies were always such of a high quality and so entertaining to watch. This is a movie from before the real glory days of Walsh and it seemed like he was still having difficulties with this movie to find its proper style and approach.

The different story lines with the different characters just don't always connect with each other. The movie also takes too long with its story to set up things and introduce its characters. The movie is already a real short one and it wastes too much time with its set up. It doesn't even become fully clear what this movie is truly going to be about until like half an hour before the end.

At first this movie even seems as if its going to be a comedy but not a really funny one though. It then picks a romantic approach and after that it turns more into a thriller/drama. This of course also makes the movie a fairly disjointed one and also works out bad for the movie its story, as well as its style.

It's mostly the last halve hour that still makes this movie a perfectly watchable enough movie. It's also then that the story becomes truly solid and the movie also turns into a more original one to watch. Before that the movie was mostly just being formulaic.

It really isn't Raoul Walsh best movie, also in terms of directing, editing and camera-work. It's a cheap and simple looking movie that lacks in style and a good main clear approach of the story. I can see and understand what Raoul Walsh tried to achieve and tried to blend some of the most successful genres of its time into one movie. It's an approach he much better executed in his later movie "The Strawberry Blond" and I'm sure that there are a couple of more better examples to mention but I haven't seen all Raoul Walsh movies obviously. It's not as if this movie is an horrible attempt and is one bad movie but it nevertheless can't be seen as a successful attempt either.

The movie also features Spencer Tracy in one of his earliest roles. His acting seemed modern for its time and he did a great job in this movie.

A movie that luckily gets better toward its end.

7/10

Captains Courageous (1937) Directed by Victor Fleming

Posted by: Frank Veenstra Posted date: 4:43 PM / comment : 0 , , , , , , , , , ,





(Review originally written at 18 June 2008)

The movie has a great story about a rich spoiled brat who falls overboard on an ocean liner and gets picked up by a crew member of a fishing vessel. They can't take him back home immediately and he has to remain aboard the vessel for three months. The spoiled brat needs to adapt himself to the crew and hard life aboard the vessel, while the crew members in return also have a hard time exception the kid as one of them. But of course aboard the ship he learns far more than fishing. He learns about life and its values and about the 'real' world. The movie has a dramatic story with several themes weaved in to it, such as most notably the father son relationship. It's however not a sappy over-the-top type of drama, as you would perhaps expect from a '30's movie. It's such a well layered story.

It's even more interesting since its being told from the viewpoint of the young character. Quite unusual for a drama, especially for one made in 1937, which makes this movie basically very good to watch for both adults as more younger people, even though it would be of course hard now days to interest them in an '30's movie. Despite being dramatic it also is above all really an adventurous movie to watch, especially for youngster of the same age as the movie its main character. It aren't really two genres that are commonly being mixed, which makes this an unique and great movie because of that reason already.

The movie has a great cast. Of course the '30's were the golden age of child actors and Freddie Bartholomew is one of those great child actors of the '30's. Other and better known child actor Mickey Rooney also plays a role in this movie, although his role is actually quite small. Second main lead of the movie is being played by Spencer Tracy. If you didn't knew it was Spencer Tracy, you would had a hard time recognizing him in his role. I think this is also the foremost reason why he won an Oscar for his role in this movie. He completely becomes a different character, of Portugese heritage. The supporting cast is surprisingly filled with lots of big names such as Lionel Barrymore, Melvyn Douglas and John Carradine. All are well cast and play their parts great.

The movie is importantly also a great looking one and most of the story is of course set aboard the boat. If there is one movie that could ever get you seasick it's this movie. The movie gives a good and realistic portrayal of life on the open sea. And despite the fact that the movie is mostly set aboard a boat, it isn't a movie that ever bores and there is always something happening in this movie, mostly thanks to its characters and actors that are portraying them.

It might very well be the best adventure drama you will ever see!

8/10

Thirty Seconds Over Tokyo (1944) Directed by Mervyn LeRoy

Posted by: Frank Veenstra Posted date: 9:27 AM / comment : 0 , , , , , , ,



(Review originally written at 23 May 2007)

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

 This is a rather enjoyable WW II about the Doolittle-raid on Japan, made during WW II itself, that however is given more credit for than it really deserves.

 Just like basically with every '40's movie is the case, the first halve is formulaic and drags on for too long. The second halve is far more powerful, original and gripping, although in this case the movie also starts to drag again toward the ending, when the movie starts to go on for far too long. The movie easily could had been 45 minutes shorter by cutting some from its beginning and let the movie end way earlier, after they crashed down in China. The movie of course also has a love-story in it to add to the drama. It's typical and formulaic but lovers of '40's movies shall probably not complain about it.

 The build up of the movie just takes too long. It provides the movie with some good and likable characters but however those get hardly featured again in the second halve of the movie. Basically the only truly real successful part of the movie was the raid itself. It had a good build up and was shot well, with the help of some tremendously good looking miniatures. In this part only the tension and action works out well and the movie starts to grab you and becomes emotionally effective. All of the other moments in the movie around that are well made but just nothing original, gripping or dramatically effective. It's just too average all. So that's also why I can't really consider this movie as a truly great genre movie.

 The movie is made during WW II, so it obviously has propaganda elements in it. It however isn't anything too disturbing but nevertheless it's a big laughable because it's so obvious. Such as when the air force and marine's constantly say how much they respect and admire each other's work, or when the Americans start to say how much they admire the Chinese and that they would be honored to fit along their side against the Japanese.

 It was WW II, so more than anything big Hollywood names were more than happy to be in a movie for the good cause. The movie features Van Johnson in the main lead and Spencer Tracy as general Doolittle. and Robert Mitchum in small role. Too small because he probably is the best actor of the bunch. But nevertheless, Van Johnson really wasn't a bad pick as the main lead of the movie.

 A good movie but I guess it's more fun and powerful to watch when you're an American yourself.

 7/10

 Watch trailer

Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde (1941) Directed by Victor Fleming

Posted by: Frank Veenstra Posted date: 8:54 AM / comment : 0 , , , , , , ,





(Review originally written at 21 September 2006)

Real problem with this movie is that it basically is a 10 year later remake of the movie "Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde" from 1931. It uses all of the best moments from that movie in this one with as a result that this movie feels lacking in true originality and creativity on its own. Still the movie is a well made one, that certainly is worth watching.

The movie is not told in the most arousing pace. The movie also doesn't always handle the story well. The inner conflict between Dr. Jekyll's good and evil side is not always notably well present. Because of all these reasons, the movie is also lacking in true tension and mystery. The movie remains interesting enough to follow but it isn't terribly creative or imaginative all. A bit of a disappointment from the director who brought us "The Wizard of Oz" and "Gone with the Wind" before.

The movie is good looking and at times its cinematography is really superb. It provides the movie with some great and spooky genre sequences, which on their own are unfortunately not enough to carry the movie to an higher level. The movie is made in a typical '40's style. Everything is cheap looking, mainly its sets, but it serves its purpose all nevertheless. It's effects are acceptable, although the make-up effects are perhaps a bit too simple. It actually made me realize how brilliant the effects and make-up effects in the '31 version all were.

The movie has some big names in its cast. Can't say that I'm too happy with the choice of Spencer Tracy for the role of Dr. Jekyll/Mr. Hyde. First of all, he was too old looking for the part and further more he doesn't play Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde always convincing enough. He isn't monstrous/villainous enough as Mr. Hyde which makes his character falls flat at times. Overall he also has a very old fashioned way of acting which doesn't really suit this movie right. Ingrid Bergman and Lana Turner are both good and well cast as the leading ladies and they still put some life into the movie its story and characters.

I know I probably sound very negative about this movie but that's just because the '31, of which this movie is an obvious remake, is so much inferior. This movie doesn't add enough on its own to the long list of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde movies.

Still the movie is quite good enough on its own. The story remains interesting and compelling and the movie features some well executed sequences, which is thanks to the professional directing and actors involved. The story is well told, even though it has some missed opportunities in it.

I recommend you watch the '31 version instead, nevertheless this movie still remain good and pleasurable on its own, to consider this a movie well worth watching.

7/10

Watch trailer
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)
Copyright © 2014 Boba_Fett1138's movie reviews
⬆
Top